the walt disney compay; rule 14a-8 no-action letter..."disney" or the...

\\\\\\\

(i , UNITÊD STATESSECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549-4561

DIVISION OF,CORPORATION FINANCE

November 16, 2009

Roger J. PattersonManaging Vice President, CounselThe Walt Disney Company500 S. Buena Vista StreetBurban CA 91521-0615

Re: The Walt Disney CompanyIncoming letter dated October 23,2009

Dear Mr. Patterson:

This is in response to your letter dated October 23,2009 concerning theshareholder proposal submitted to Disney by Wiliam Steiner. We also have received aletter on the proponent's behalf dated October 28,2009. Our response is attached to theenclosed photocopy of your correspondence. By doing this, we avoid having to recite orsumarze the facts set forth in the correspondence. Copies of all of the correspondencealso wil be provided to the proponent.

In connection with this matter, your attention is directed to the enclosure, whichsets forth a brief discussion of the Division's informal procedures regarding shareholderproposals.

Heather L. MaplesSenior Special Counsel

Enclosures

cc: John Chevedden

*** FISMA & OMB Memorandum M-07-16 ***

November 16,2009

Response of the Offce of Chief CounselDivision of Corporation Finance

Re: The Wait Disney CompanyIncoming letter dated October 23, 2009

The proposal requests that the board take the steps necessar so that eachshareholder voting requirement in Disney's charer and bylaws that calls for a greater

. than simple majority vote be changed to a majority of the votes cast for and againstrelated proposals in compliance with applicable laws.

There appears to be some basis for your view that Disney may exclude theproposal under rule 14a-8(i)(9). You represent that matters to be voted on at theupcoming shareholders' meeting include proposals sponsored by Disney seekingapproval of amendments to Disney's certificate of incorporation. You also represent thatthe proposal has terms and conditions that conflict with those set forth in Disney'sproposals. You indicate that the proposal and the matters to be sppnsored by Disneypresent alternative and conflicting decisions for shareholders and that submitting all ofthe proposals to a vote could provide inconsistent and ambiguous results. Accordingly,we wil not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if Disney omits theproposal from its proxy materials in reliance on rule 14a-8(i)(9). In reaching thisposition, we have not found it necessar to address the alternative basis for omissionupon which Disney relies.

Sincerely, Michael J. ReedichSpecial Counsel

DIVISION OF CORPORATION FINANCE INFORMAL PROCEDURES REGARDING SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS

The Division of Corporation Finance believes that its responsibility with respect to matters arising under Rule 14a-8 (17 CFR 240.14a-8), as with other matters under the proxy rules, is to aid those who must comply with the rule by offering informal advice and suggestions and to determine, initially, whether or not it may be appropriate in a paricular matter to recommend enforcement actionto the Commission. In coimection with a shareholder proposal under Rule 14a-8, the Division's staff considers the information furnished to it by the Company in support of its intention to exclude the proposals from the Company's proxy materials, as well as any information furnshed by the proponent or the proponent's representative.

Although Rule 14a-8(k) does not require any communications from shareholders to the Commission's staff, the staff wil always consider information concerning alleged violations of the statutes administered by the Commission, including argument as to whether or not activities proposed to be taken would be violative of the statute or rule involved. The receipt by the staff of such information, however, should not be construed as changing the staffs informal procedures and proxy review into a formal or adversary procedure.

It is important to note that the staffs and Commission's no-action responses to Rule 14a-8G) submissions reflect only informal views. The determinations reached in these noaction letters do notand cannot adjudicate the merits of a company's position with respect to the proposal. Only a court such as a U.S. District Court can decide whether a company is obligated to include shareholder proposals in its proxy materials. Accordingly a discretionar determination not to recommend or take Commission enforcement action, does not preclude a proponent, or any shareholder of a company, from pursuing any rights he or she may have against the company in court, should the management omit the proposal from the company's proxy materiaL.

.~. The (ei;~Slp Company

Roger J. Patterson

Managing Vice President, Counsel Registered In-House Counsel

r-..)C;~

October 23, 2009 ~J. C::

..p

~~ U.S. Securties and Exchange Commission rT"¡

r'V C'~;;'

Divísion of Corporation Finance v. i ¡

Offce of Chief Counsel -p"" ;¡ :1: r-';100 F Street, N.E. .,

.~. rWashington, D.C. 20549 . ,.....?-..¡'.¡ a

Re: The Walt Disney Company - Notice of Intent to Omit Sharehòlder Proposal from Proxy Materials Pursuant to Rule 14a-8 Promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Request for No-Action Ruling

Ladies and Gentlemen:

corporation (wìth its consolidated subsidiares,Thè Walt Disney Company, a Delaware

14a-8(j) under the Securties and"Disney" or the "Company"), is filing this letter under Rule .

Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), to notify the Securties and Exchange Disney's intention to exclude a shareholder proposal (theCommission (the "Commission") of

Shareholders (the"Proposal") from the proxy materials for Disney's 2010 Anual Meeting of

"2010 Proxy Materials"). The Proposal was submitted by Wiliam Steiner (the "Proponent"). The Company is advised that the Proponent is being represented by Mr. John Chevedden. The

the Commission (the "Staff') not recommend to the Commission that any enforcement action be taken if it excludes the Proposal from its 2010 Proxy Materials under Rule 14a-8(i)(9) because the Proposal directly conficts with proposals the Company intends to include in its 2010 Proxy Materials. In

Company asks that the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance of

the Proposal violates the proxy rules by containing multiple shareholder proposals, and false and misleading statements. Accordingly, the Proposal may also be excluded under Rule i 4a-8(i)(3) or, if it is not excluded, certin statements in the supporting statement should be excluded.

addition,.the Company is of the view that the substace of

Legal Bulletin 14D (November 7, 2008), we are transmitting this letter via electronic mail to the Staff at shareholderproposals(fsec.gov in lieu of mailing paper copies.

Pursuant to Staff

this letter to Mr. Chevedden at the e-mail address he supplied. Pursuant to Rule 14a-8(j, this letter is being submitted not less than 80 days before the Company intends to file its definitive 2010 Proxy Materials with the Commission.

We are also sending a copy of

THE PROPOSAL

A copy of the Proposal and related correspondence is attached to this letter as Exhibit A. For the convenience of the staff, the text of the Proposal is set forth below:

\\\500 S. Buena Vista Street, Burbank, CA 91521-0615

Tel 818560.6126 Fax 818563.4160 roger.patterson¡gdisney.com

\ (f Disney

U.S. Securtîesand Exchatge Cömmssion October 23,2009 Page 2

I . (

Goldman Sachs (GS) 75% James McRitchie (Sponsor) Waste Management (WMI) 80% Wiliam Steiner FirstEnergy (FE) 80% Ray T. Chevedden Macy's (M) 88% Wiliam Steiner

The merits of this Simple Majority Vote proposal should also be considered in the the need to initiate improvements in our company's corporate governance. Forcontext of

instace in 2009 the following governance and performance issues were identified:

. The Corporate Library http://ww.thecorporatelibrar.com.anindependent

investment research firm, rated our company "D" OveralL.

"High Governance Risk Assessment." "Very High Concern" in executive pay - $30 millon for Robert Iger.

. Aylwin Lewis, who constituted 25% of our Executive Pay and Nomination

Committees, was designated a "flagged (problem) director" due to his Hallburon, which had units that fied for

Chapter 11 Banptcy. involvement with the board of

. We had no shareholder right to: 1) Call a special meeting. 2) A simple majority vote standard. 3) Cumulative voting.

. Eight of our directors also served on boards rated "D" or "F" by The

Corporate Library: John Bryson Boeing (BA) John Pepper Boston Scientific (BSX) John Chen Wells Fargo (WFC)

\\

U.S. Securties and Exchange Commission October 23,2009

. Page 3

Judith Estr F~dEx (FDX) Monica Lozao Ban of America (BAC) orI Smith NI (N) F-rated Robert Matschullat Visa (V)

Susan Arold McDonald's (MCD) The aböve concerns shows there is need for improvement. Please encourage our board to respond positively to ths proposal:

Adopt SiIple Majority Vote

Yes on 3

GROUNS FOR EXCLUSION

1. Rule 14a-8(i)(9) - Conficts with Company's Proposal

Under Rule 14a-8(i)(9), a shareholder proposal may be omitted from a company's proxy the company's own proposals to be submitted to

shareholders at the same meeting." statement if the proposal "conflcts with one of

The Proposal seeks to change to a simple majority voting stadard all shareholder voting

requirements in the Company's certificate of incorporation and bylaws that call for a greater than the Company's Restated

Certification ofIncorporation (the "Certificate") and the Amended and Restated Bylaws (the simple majority vote. The Proposal implicates two requirements of

"Bylaws"). l

The first is contained in Aricles VII and VIII of the Certificate relating to business combinations (a merger, sale of all or substantially all of the Company's assets, or purchase of all

the assets of another entity) with persons ("Interested Persons") who holdor substatially of

more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the Company at the time of the transaction. Article

the outstanding shares to approve any business combination with an Interested Person unless (i) the transaction is approved by the Company's Board of Directors and (ii) a majority of the members of the Board were members of the Board before the

VII requires a vote of four-fifths of

1 In addition, the Certificate requires the affrmative vote of the voting power

of the stock of the Company entitled to vote generally in the election of directors in order to increase or decrease the number of authorized shares, as required by Section 242 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. Since a change in this provision would not be in compliance with applicable laws, we do not interpret the Proposal as implicating this provision. The Certificate also contains various provisions relating to votes of separate classes of stock and these provisions require a vote of a majority of shares of the relevant class outstanding. These provisions are no longer operative, however, because the separate classes of stock referred to in these provisions are no longer outstanding.

the holders of a majority of

\

U.S. Securties and Exchange Commssion October 23,2009 Page 4

Interested Person acquired more than 5% of the CompåñY's shares. Aricle VIII requies a vote

offour-fifts of outstading the shares to amend Aricle VII.

The second supermajority requiement implicated by the Proposal is the requiement in the Bylaws.Aricle X of the Certificate and Aricle IX of the Bylaws relating to amendment of

These provisions require a vote of two-thds of the outstading shares to anend the Company's Bylaws unèss the amendment is approved by the Board of Directors (in which case" no shareholder vote is required).

The Board of Directors of the Company has expressed its intent to present to shareholders at the 2010 Anual Meeting proposals to amend each of the provisions of the Certificate implicated by the Proposal. Specifically, the Board intends to propose amendments to Aricles VII and VIII to reduce the percentage of outstading shares required to approve transactions with Interested Persons'(and to amend this provision otthe Certificate) from four-fifts to two-thirds. This is the shareholder vote that is required for approval of certin transactions with "interested

the Delaware General Corporation Law. Section 203, whilestockholders" under Section 203 of

the Company's Certificate, is analogous to these provisions and the Board has determined that it would be appropriate to adopt the voting it differs in'some respects from the provisions of

stadard set for in Section 203.

Second, the Board intends to propose an amendment to Aricle X of the Certificate (and, the Bylaws) to reduce the

vote required for shareholder amendment of Bylaws from two-thirds of outstanding shares to a majority of outstading shares. The Board has determined that this level of approval is appropriate to protect minority rights under the bylaws.

if that amendment is approved by shareholders, to amend Aricle IX of

If included in the Company's proxy statement, the Proposal would conflct directly with the Company proposals described above. The Company's proposals seek a change in exactly the provisions implicated by the Proposal, but propose a different approach. If the Proposal were

the votes on the Proposal and the Company'sincluded in the proxy statement, the results of

proposals could yield inconsistent, ambiguous or inconclusive results. For example, if the votes cast, but none

received the number of votes necessary to amend the Certificate, it would not be clear whether Proposal and each of the Company's proposals received a majority of

(a) the Company should take steps to implement the shareholder's ~roposal by submitting amendments conforming to the Proposal at the next shareholders meeting or (b) because the Company's proposals did not pass, the Company should conclude that there is insuffcient support for reducing the supermajority requirements so that submitting amendments conforming to the Proposal to a shareholder vote would be futile.

\

.'

U.S. Securties and Exchange Commssiön October 23,2009 Page 5

votes cast and one or more of the Company's proposals received sufcient votes to be adopted, it would not be clear

Alternatively, iftle shareholder Proposal receivéd a majority of

whether there would be suffcient support for fuer reducing the super-majority requirements.2

in reliance on under Rule 14a-8(i)(9)The stahas consistently granted no-action relief

and its predecessor, Rule 14a8( c )(9), with respect to proposals in which an affrmative vote on both the shareholder proposal and the company's proposal would lead to an inconsistent, ambiguous or inconclusive result. See, e.g., Best Buy Co., Inc.(April 17,2009) ("Best Buy"); AOL Time Warner, Inc. (March 3,2003), First Niagara Financial Group, Inc. (March 7,2002);

24, 2000), Gabelli Equity Trust (March 15, 1993); Fitchburg Gas andOsteotech, Inc. (April

Electric Co. (July 30, 1991). Best Buy involved substatively the same proposal as that

presented here. As here, Best Buy put forth proposals to amend each of the provisions of its charer and bylaws implicated by the shareholder's proposal. The staff concured that there was a basis to exclude the proposal under Rule 14a-8(i)(9).

For the foregoing reasons, the Company believe it may properly exclude the Proposal from the 2010 Proxy Materials under Rule 14a-8(i)(9).

Proxy Rules,- Prohibited Electoral Tying Arangement

2. Rule 14a-8(i)(3) - Violation of

Rule 14a-4(a)(3). Under Rule 14a-8(i)(3), a shareholder proposal may be omitted from a company's proxy

The Proposal is inconsistent with the "unbundling" provisions of

statement if the proposal is contrar to any of the Commssion's proxy rules. Rule 14a-4(a)(3) requires the form of proxy to "identify clearly and imparially each separate matter intended to be acted upon, whether or not related to or conditioned on the approval of other matters, and whether proposed by the registrant or by security holders." As the Commission explained with respect to Rule 14a-4(a) in Exchange Act Release No. 31326 (Oct. 16, 1992), the rule "prohibits

put before shareholders for approval." electoral tying arangements that restrict shareholder voting choices on matters'

The Proposal asks shareholders to vote on whether to ask the Board to take steps to change "each shareholder voting requirement in our charer and bylaws that calls for a greater than simple majority vote." The Proposal does not identify the provisions affected by this request, but as described above, the Proposal implicates two distinct sets of provisions in the

2 The situation is further complicated by the fact that the shareholder's Proposal encompasses more than

one change to the Certificate, while the Company's proposals wil address each change separately, so that it would not be clear whether a vote for the shareholder's Proposal expresses support for both changes or

the changes. We address this as a stlparate ground for excluding the Proposal below.just one of

. U.S. Securties and Exchange Commssion October 23, 2009 Page 6

Company's Certificate and Býlaws: one dealing with business combination transactions with

interested persons; the other dealing with amendment of the Company's Bylaws. The Proposal does not give shareholders'the opportty to distingush between these two sets of provisions. Their choices are therefore restrcted to voting for ¡both changes or agaist both changes.

However, these two sets of provisions may not be viewed equally by sharehnlders. A shareholder may very well approve reduction to the supermajority provision for shareholder

bylaw amendments but disapprove of a reduction to the supermajority provision forapproval of

shareholder approval of business combination transactions, or vice versa. The Proposal does not 3

give shareholders the opportty to vote for one change and against the other.

In similar situtions, in which the proponent has not stated the proposal in a way to in Rule 14a-8(i)(3), the Commission has agreed to the

exclusion of proposals that dealt with a single general subject matter because they presented two separate proposals. See HealthSouth Corporation (April 6, 2006) (exclusion of a proposal presenting two amendments to two separate and distinct provisions of the company's bylaws

satisfy the "single proposal" requirement

directors);even thougli both amendments related to the size and composition of the board of

Centra Software (March 31, 2003 ) (exclusion of a proposal that consisted of two components related to director independence); Fotoball, Inc. (May 6, 1997), (exclusion of a shareholder proposal recommending amendment of the company's Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws or governance policies to impose various requirements relating to director compensation and stock ownership). Here, the Proponent is attempting to satisfy the "single proposal" requirement of Rule 14a-8( c) by arful wording, but in doing so he restricts shareholder choices in contravention of Rule 14a-4(a)(3).

For this reason, the Company believes it may properly exclude the Proposal from the 2010 Proxy Materials under Rule 14a-8(i)(3).

Proxy Rules - Materially False and Misleading Statements

3. Rule 14a-8(i)(3) - Violation of

As the Staff explained in Staff Legal Bulletin No. 14B (Sept. 15,2004), Rule 14a8(i)(3) permits the exclusion of all or par of a shareholder proposal or the supporting statement if, among other things, the company demonstrates objectively that a factual statement is materially false or misleading.

3 Of course, if the Proposal were bifurcated to address the two questions separately, one of the proposals

would violate Rule 14a-8( c), which limits proponents to one proposal for a paricular shareholder

meeting.

CommssionU.S. Securties and Exchange

October 23, 2009 Page 7

In ths regard, we request that, if the Staff does hot cohcur in the exc1tiiortof the proposa in its entirety for the reasons set fort above, the Sta concur with exclusion of the followig sentençe of the supporting statement because of the numerous inaccuracies it contans: "Aylwi Lewis, who constituted 25% of our Executive Pay and Nomiation Commttees, was

Halliburon,designated a~flagged (problem) director' due to his involvement with the board of

which had unts that filed for Chapter 11 Banptcy." The false and misleading elements of this statement include the followig;

. Mr. Lewis is one offive (not four) members of each of the Compensation

Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee (which are misnamed by the Proponent the "Executive Pay" and "Nomination" committees).

. The Corporate Library (to whom we assume the Proponent is referring, though ths is not specified) nowhere describes a "flagged" director as a "problem" director.

. The statement fails to note that the "banptcy" referred to as a basis for Mr. Lewis being a flagged director was a 2004 prepackaged Chapter 11 proceeding settling all open and futue asbestos- and silica-related claims against certain Hallburon subsidiares.4 By omitting these detals and stating that it is the basis for considering Mr. Lewis a "problem" director, the statement falsely implies that the proceeding evidenced some failure of

Hallburon's directors when, in fact, the proceeding constituted nothg more than a mechansm for the efficient and effective resolution of asbestos- and silca-related claims. The statement also implies that Mr. Lewis is curently a member of the Board of Hallburon,

business judgment upon the par of

Hallburon since 2005.though he has not served on the Board of

4 See Note 10 to the financial statements contained in Halliburton's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the

year ended December 31,2008.

U.S. Securties and Exchange Commssion'October 23, 2009Page 8

For ths reason, the Company believe it may properly exclude the referenced sentence ofthe supporting statement for the Proposal from the 2010 Proxy Materials under Rule 14a-8(i)(3).

CONCLUSION

Based upon the. foregoing analysiS, the Company hereby respectfully requests that theStaff confir that it will not recommend enforcement action if the Proposal is excluded from theCompany's 2010 Proxy Materials or, alternatively, if the reférenèed sentence of the supportngstatement of the Proposal is excluded. Please do not hesitate to call me at (818) 560-6126 or byretu e-mail if you require additional information or wish to discuss this submission fuer.Please acknowledge receipt of this letter by retu e-maiL.

We request that you transmit your response bye-mail to the undersigned atRoger.Patterson(fDisney.com and understad that you can transmit your response to theProponent through Mr. Cheveddenat

Than you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,~~"ç,J~Roger J. Patterson

cc: John Chevedden

Wiliam Steiner

Attachment: Exhibit A - Proposal and correspondence


Mr. John E. PepperCharman of the BoardThe Walt Disney Company'500 S Buena Vista StBurban CA 91521PH: 818 560-1000FX: 818-560-1930

Rule i 4a-8 Proposa

Dea Mr. Pepper,

I sebOOt my-atthed Rule 14a-8-propsal in support of.the long-term.poi:ceof.-ur - _. ..,.-

company. My proposal is for the next anua shareholder meetig~ I intend to meet Rule 14a-8requiements including the contiuous ownership of the requied stock value un afer the date

of the respective shaeholder meeting. My submitted format, with the shaholder-suppliedemphasis, is intended to be us for definitive proxy publication. This is my proxy for John

Chevedden and/or his designee to forward ths Rule 14a-8 proposa to the company and to act onmy behalf regarding this Rule l4a-8 proposa, and/or modifcation of it, for the forthcomishareholder meeting before, durg and afer the fortcoming shareholder meet. Please direct

to faciltate prompt and verifiable communcations. Pleae identify ths proposa as my proposalexclusively.

Your consideration and the consideration of the Boad of Directors is appreciate in support of

the long-term pedormce of our company. Plea acknowledge receipt of my proposalpromptly by emaiL.

Sincerely,

_. rNÆ-"-"'~Wiliam Steiner

WJL'AlDate

ilsjo '1

cc:cc: Alan Braveran --Alan.Braveran(qisney.com~Corporate Secretary



£DIS: Rule 14a-8 Proposa, September 14,2009)_ . 3 - Adopt Simple l\ajonty Vote RESOLVED, Shaeholders reues th our board tae the stps necessar so tht eah shaholder yoting requirement in our charer and bylaws, tht cas for a greate th siple

vote cas for and agaist relate proposas inmajority vote, be chaged to a majority of the

conipliance with applicable laws. Ths includes eah 80% sheholder votig provision ii ourcharer and/or bylaws. . Curently a 1 %-miority ca frate the will of our 79%-shareholder majority. Our supemajority vote requimen.ts can. be almost impossible to obta when one considers abstentions and broker non-votes. For example, a Goodyear (GT) maagement proposa for.

faied to pass even though 90% of votes cast were yes-votes. Supermajority requiements are argubly most often used to block intiatives supported by most shareowners but opposed by management.

anual election of each diector .

The Council of Intutional Investors ww.cii.org recommends adoption of simple maority

voting. This proposa topic won up to 88% support at the followig companes in 2009: Goldman Sachs (OS) 75% James McRitchie (Sponsor) -Waste Management (WM) 80% Wiliam, Steiner FirstEnergy (FE) 80% Ray T. CheveddenMacy's (M) 88% Wilia Steiner

The merits-ofthis Simple Majority Vote proposal should also be considered in the context of the need to initiate improvements in our company's corporate governce. For intace in 2009 the

following governce and perormnce issues were identified: · The Corporate Librar htt://ww.thecorporatelibrar.com.anindependent investment

reseach fir, rated our compaiy "D" Overall. "High Governace Risk Assessment." "Very High Concern)' in executive pay - $30 millon for Robert Iger~

· Aylwin Lewis, who consttued 25% of our Executive Pay and Nomination Commttees, was designated a "flagged (problem) director" due to his involvement With the board of Hallburton, which had unts that filed for Chapter 1 i Banptcy. · We had no shareholder right to:

1) Call a special meeting. 2) A simple majority vote stdard. 3) Cumulative votig.

· Eight of our diectors also served on boards rated "D" or "F" by The Corporate Librar: John Bryson Boeing (BA) John Pepper Boston Scientific (BSX)John Chen Wells Fargo (WC) Judith Estr FedEx (FDX) Monica Lozao Ban of America (BAC)Orin Smith NIKE (N) F -rated Robert Matschulat Visa (V)

Susan Arnold McDonald's (MCD) The above conces shows there is need for improvement. Please encourage our board to respond positively to this proposal:

Adopt Simple Majority Vote Yes on 3

Notes:Willam Steiner sponsored this proposal: .

The above formt is. requested for publication without re-editi, re-formttg or elimtion of

text, includig beging and concludig text, uness prior ageeent is reached. It isrespectfly requested that this proposa be proofrea before it is published in the defitiveproxy to ensue that the integrty of the submitt formt is replicated in the proxy materials.Please advise if there is any tyogrphica queson.

Pleas note that the title of the proposal is par of the arguent infavor of the proposal. In theinterest of clarty and to avoid confion the title of ths and each other balot item is requested tobe consistent thoughout all the proxy materals.

The company is request to assign a proposal number (represented by ~'3" above) based on thechronological order in which proposas are submittd. The request designation of "3" or

higher number alows for ratification of auditors to be item 2. .

This proposal is believed to conform with Sta Legal Bulleti No. 14B (CF), September 15,

2004 includin (emphasis added): .Accordingly, going forward, we believe that it would not be appropriate forcompanies to exclude supporting statement language and/or an entire proposal inreliance on rule 14a-8(i)(3) in the following circumstances:

· the company objects to factual assertions because they are not supported;· the company objects to factual assertions that, while not materially false ormisleading, may be disputed or countered;· the company objects to factual assertions because those assertions may beinterpreted by shareholders in a manner that is unfavorable to the company, itsdirectors, or its offcers; and/or .· the cömpany objects to statements because they represent tlíe opinion of theshareholder proponent or a referenced source, but the statements are notidentified specifcally as such.

We believe that it is appropriate under rule 14a-B for companies to addresthese objections in their statements of opposition.

See also: Sun Microsystems, Inc. (July 21,2005).Stock will be held until after the anual meeting and the proposa wil be presented at the anualmeeting. Please acknowledge ths proposal promptly by email *** FISMA & OMB Memorandum M-07-16 ***

.........::::-,.;"l ::::'.y_....:'.: ...:'t:~::~:;:;,,:::"'¡:ir¡+¡.¡.~.~:'~A::~:õ:'.::.~~.:.h~~~':"'''~~~~..:;::~.:~.."~~~:'~:-,,r:v.:.:......~~...~~;,~~~o(.:~;t~:~;;-:'iy.~~~~.;.:.;.;:':¥t::;"';;.i

;~d

. ....... .... ..., ..

:Qrplf:

=~~t:~i

,'~~.i1~~i'f,:~i;' ~",,'Âl\Ó;~.~~.:".,..la. .,~.. ,~~~~~~;7'-..... .::i:

'¥"~ø~E:M'~ll:f:~l!;U~JJl.

;~,~;Mrr;iS~~ll¡~;:

Xbi~:t~~~4-~knQWlt..

.~~¡::~\~~fkÎ~d~~~í~gad..,......~~:~ji:t~~:~;~~~/~:t~~~;:~r~;;:61~tÎa1

.:sÍlple:IIajt)rity"~ôt~. '.

~~~,~yeJiiøm1.~\1,tnatygll\m ,~tlie eligjbiUty l'éq~l'~melÌts for submitting a pl, J'.serfó~

ln~ìtø:~14a¥8~~~.... ..' . '~)~;j~ëe . . '~ka\ë~e~vtt ~. ~ednö1:;ati,., ,........... " "." ........ ller..øf'shij~sJ\ld,YPll-1ia¥(tl1QtçQni~t_.. . '." .l;th~;l1e(f~~~meQtQ.f~ule,1:ia-g(n~(2l(i)thRtYQtlprQÝi~e,R

W¡lt~ii'Statø..n#~t;,~9ro:.,tltr~Ç8tn.'ll9la~t'Cffslì~~YQ~....J1g~tlç,ialIY:..P~."e,J;ityjlg'j~~àl'ÝgÍ; .ooñtinÙ()uŠ~hêldsêcUïiíìès.. öfl1nr...Walt..~iSleyi~omPanYIøt'ât..leastone'Yêäti' *Šrêqùitet' b~..

It~. 'ì4ad8"~í)l"ì)"yoii..sbQtitl;'prø)ride'us,''With.tbjsfstat~mentWÌthiii, '14"days'of'YQurreøelpt¡ø-ftli&l~tt~t.. .. ..

eç: Jonn êh~vedden

hö~

ù.b¡'mej


Patterson, Roger

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:Attchments:

' Friday, October 02, 2009 7:51 AMPatterson, RogerAlan BravermanRUle 14a:"8 Broker Letter-(DIS)

CCEOOOOO.pdf

Mr. Patterson,Please see the attached broker letter. Please advise whether there are now any rule 14a-8 openitems.Sincerely,John Chevedden

cc: Wiliam Steiner

i


r'

.-inJLDISCOUNT BROKERS

Da: J ocr jOO c.

To whom it may cocern:

As intr acunt of W, 1 \ ia-iN S t. et l"oo v .

account num ld with Nationa Finacial Seces Corp.as custodian. DJF Diunt Broker herby certifies that as orthe date of ths certification~t llC4w' Sl: -e f.n ~r is an ha ben the beeficial owner of ~shes of W 0\ L t Ì) ì 5 l'""~ ~. ; having held at lea tit thousan dollarwort of the above mentiond sety sinc th followig date: i" 1"1/ () l . also havingheld at lea two thousd dollar wort of th above mentioned seunty frm at leat one

yea prior to the date the prposal wa submitte to the compa.

Sincerely.

Y1tJk ifLv./(.-lMar Filbeno.PresidentDJF Discunt Broke

7671

Fax # 'b I ir - çl.O ,ì" '1D

phone#

Fax #

Phone It

1981 Marcus Avenue. Suite CII4 . Lake Success. NY 11042

516'328-1600 800.695.EAY www.djfdis.com fax 516.328-1323



Patterson, Roger

From:Sent:To:Subject:

Patterson, Roger, ,"Monday, October 05, 2009 11 :07 AM,olmstedRE: Rule 14a-8 Broker Letter-(DIS)

There are no additional procedural items under 14a-8, questions 1 through 5.

From: olmsted - Sent: Friday, October 02,20097:55 AMTo: Patterson, RogerSubject: Rule 14a-8 Broker Letter-(DIS)

Mr. Patterson,Please see the attached broker letter. Please advise whether there are now any rule 14a-8 openitems.Sincerely,John Chevedden

cc: Willam Steiner

i


October 28, 2009

Offce of Chief Counsel

Di~~on of Co~ration Flice ,

Securties and Exchange Commssion100 F Street, NE .Washigton, DC 20549

# 1 The Walt Disney Company (DIS)Wiliam Steiner's Rule 14a-8 Proposal

Lades and Gentlemen:

This responds to the October 23, 2009 no action request At ils point the proposed company.action is purely speculatve. For ils reaon it is reuested that the sta riot grt ils no action

request.

The company in effect clal that if the company had six supeajonty pro~sions, that aproponent mus spend six years to address the supermajority topic.

Additionally, the company does not dispute that Mr. Lewis was one of four members, etc.durng the tie,period specifed in the rule 14a-S.proposa. The company does not dispute that

The Corporate Libra term "flagged director" replaces the ''problem director" term and that thecurrent definition of a "flagged director" includes the word "problem.'''

The company parsing of words on banptcy is addressed by the following teJ( included with. the proposal:

This proposal is believed to conform with Staff Legal Bulletin No. 14B(CF),September 15, 2004 including (emphasis added):

Accordingly, going forward, we believe that it would not be appropriate forcompanies to exclude supporting statement language and/or an entire proposalin relianæ on rule 14a-8(i)(3) in the following circumstanæs:

· the company objects to factual assertions that, while not materially false ormisleading, may be disputed or countered;

We believe that it is appropnate under rule 14a-8 for companies to addressthese objections in their statements of opposition.

F or these reasns it is requested that the staff not grant this no action request. It is alsorespectfully requested that the shareholder have the las opportty to submit material - since

the company had the first opportty.


Sincerely~

". ..~ "'' ~

cc: Wiliam Steiner

Roger Patterson -coger.Patterson(gdisney .cóm~

rher~f'&Ni"fCQmpany

October 23, 2009

U.8.SemJritics andExchan~e CmiirnìsSlon Dlvtsiü:o .Qf COJl'lO:ïildonlii'l\'e

Ollicc .of ChiefCüoosel l(J(llStreêt, N.li. \Vl,lshi;ngton, D.C. 20549

Re; The- \V$¡h Disney CompMj" - Notice of Intent to Omit Sh~relioldcr . sal.lrom ProXy lvfmtcrÍ¡ils 14.irsi.mnl to Rule 14a,,8 lromul1J:ated undr the Securities G'llal1geAet......_--.-'-_.....-' - - ': - --',",,'_:-- ---_._------.--:--:--_::-~-,-,---:-_._-_.:-- ',- --"",' -- --

ofl934, as arneoded"imd Reqi1e$¡ f.¡t Nu-A.ctkifl Ruling

Ladíes..:and..Gendemen:

Tht: Walt Disney Company, ~. Dciaiware corporation (""'iih its consolidat'Cd s,ubsidiaries. "Dasne~'" or ile "CoinpaiiiY); iS trliiig this letter under Rule 14á..8(j under the Securìtacs mid E~l.bangc Act of 1934, liS ameoded (the '"Exehrige Act'),~oö(ìtit). the' Securities afd Exc1'ge Commission (the '''Qmmissioo'') of Disne:i/s intctiiiort to cxchlde l' shareholder p.ropo5a~ (the "Proposar')fhYJ1 the pm,,:) imited:as; for Disney~s 2010 Annual i.,leeting ofShareholrlets (th "2CHO Proxy 1'..1~ter¡al$"'). Tbe Proposal wa(¡ :mbmitttXl by wim~m Sl . '''Plr)porler~r;)"

The Company is advised thai t j sbcing n:¡pTcscntcd by Mrhevcddcn, The Company asks dlilt íhe staff of of Corpomtion FinanL': of the COffli:d $sion (the "Sl~ln''') not n;çummend (() fJ: Commissi(Kn that tmy èti fi)rcerni:nt ~çtiol1 be I('ken if it èXtl udi:s the IJi'ûpmml from Its 20W !Proxy 1..'Iaterials under Rule l4a~8(ì:l(9) because the lropos~d directly c(mJlícts '\vhb ¡:tt'f)flOSalsibe Company intends to iuclude in ¡t:: 20if) Pr();.~Y MaÌì;~r¡(ih;. I.il addition. ~li Com p~i:1i is üflhc v i(;w tha:t the $ubshu:içt of the PlQPQ5~i vioJatçs the proxy ruh;:s by,containing multiple shareJiolder proposals; and false and mislmding s.tatements. Accordingly. the l~rnposnl may al.o b~ excluded l.mder Rule 14a~$(n(.) or, if1t is nüt exchided, certait, st-atemen.sin the :1'1lppnrtng sl:atem;int sbmild bç exciut!ed,

lurlMnt to Staff l.egalf~uHeiin 14-1 (NtJvembcr 1, :2(ID8), we ar LI'atlSrnhting this letter via eicctn:.nic mail töthe Staff at shareilQidéq:i'Op(is~ì,I$GÊ:5ëc,gov in lieu ù . t copies.

We are also sending a copy üftms letter to. I\.k Chevedden at tir e.mæJ 3drl supplied, PUn!l,aot to Rule I 4a-8(j), this letter i:s beÎJ)§ sutmiitted not less rlwi 80 days before the Company intens tome its ddinitive 2010 Proxy Mate:i~lI5 with Ihe Commisskm.

THEPRoi"Os'j.lL

A ropy öf the Proposal iind related correspondence: is al1ad:icd to this lcttera8 Exhibit A. F'Ül' the cur:ri.enjençe of the stilff~ ibete;xt riftbe Prøl;:sa.l i5J set forth bt:!ov.': .

u.s. SecW'des arld EXçh~mgc CommÍsslon Oi;~üibcr :13.2009 P~gc 2

3- AdQi)lSimphr NbjorityVnte RESOLVBf),. Sb~rellt)ide'tsretiue;t..íhat4)ur..ooard.take..the....$1eps.neees8~rY...S(llh~it.each Sb~rehl)Wer voting.rcl1ÍrcuerithlOLlcbarter.amj. byj4ws.that.ciln$fqr~...F7eater than

simple inajodty voie, oochiin~~dtQafm~()tiiJt)f the vntesdcastfoT ..u:idagaiostl'elat.ed proposals. ÎJt(Alt1.pHanct' vi.\ll'ha;plicabiclaws. This indudes.each SO:W¡ sharcholder 'ioti:r pm\tisÜmin our d:i:anflr 31idlQr b)'%a'i'ls,

C:ntrt:ntlytll~,"ii~minorlt).. c,an frnstl'at12tne \\Lm (tf't)~lr 79%~shttrliolder majority_ Our sJJpcrm~jOlHy vote ircq'Utrementscaribe ahn03(impü5siòlc to obtain \NnCn noe considers

absienth;il's and btt)tcrnm:i~Yo.øs.. For example, a.(it)Qdyear (CJ"I) mllM;g(;nlCnt pmposal t;br ,mnmd el~ctì'onofeah dh'cctor.faHet) .tQPâ$ .c)'lm though 90'Y"of 'IÏèotcs.c38Ìwer(, yes..votes, .. Supe~naj("diyreqdLitr~mentsMtatguably Uioir afnu~d lQbIock initiuJiV'i-s suppori:edbj'most. shareo'l\'llcrsbut opposed by managein.ent,

Tlie.Caiuiùil.~;)f In.stituti(inä~. fuv~tors.\\'\vw.cíi_org..l'ecommendS.~ídopt¡.önQrsìmpfct :rttaj(idty vt.1íing. This proposal topiç\vQn up to. SS% s!tipport at tire tbllm'\ìugconipaniei;Ìii¿OQl): .

(kilcman Saclis(GS) 75% J~lmcsJ\.1cRilchie (SpOl15l)c)

\V'iL"teM~Ltû:geiniL"Jlt (WMI) SU% Wi main Steiner FltstEncrgy (FE) ~l(% Ray 'L Chr;vtxdcn. Ma~Y~.$..(M) 88% Wiliam Stdner

The m.¡rÜs of this Símpl€ Majority V ote proäk)~l$ho'Utd aíso be cQnsìdcn:~d in the

conh::xt of th-c nee.d to initiate improv.;mieni,s in mir company;s .cm-pol'ate gúverriÆli)ç"f. For ills~~ce in 2009 ¡be ft'tllowing governance find perforrmince i~:mes "'''en: identificti;

it The COltoraie tibrnry http;tlwviii.v.tfnx:orpomteHbrnrv.cütY1".an indep.ndienl

invesimcriì ri::sèarcli finn, raood our cornpmiy ."Dt' Overall. i"H¡~h Governance Risk ASScssiiicnC'

""Very High Concern" in executlve pay ~ ;$30 rnm'i.:m ftir Rubi:lgcr.

'" Ayhvin Lewls" who ('O)L')tit~lted 25% of Our E-;c;itlvc finyand NomimitkJu ComnÜttees, Wtl ~;.flaggcd r problem 1 director!? due fo higÎnvolvC'Dcnt with ofHallìburt.oii, whkh bad unHs Üiút mèd n,r Chapter 11

. We. hadílo

l)C2) A. majorít)' '\iote :starar. J) Crn:nii1ative voÜng,

ii Hight 1)1' t.lLlr diretors also served on boards rated "D'" 01' "I;" by The. Corprate Librar)':

J dim Bryson Bo..ing (BA) John Pepper Boston S.deritifc (BSX) John Chen Wells Fargo (WFCl

tJ.8. St'Aulitíns ~U'ldExdiange Cüui:mission (~ctobcr 23, 200Çl Page 3

JudtthBSilnrt F~dEx (FDX) Monica Lozanu 13a.tikof Atnienç(i (BAC) OrinSnHth NIKE.(NKE)F-ratoo Ro~rtMn(S:t¡lmUat Vísa ('\l) SustHiAmrild l\'itJ)o:r~kts(~'!C'D:~

Thc:ibove .cQ'iiceJj)$s'hows th.ere is need Jhr ímprovt'mcnt, Please~JlcøUrø.ge (lur bmml to respoodposit1vetytu tbisproposnl:

A(I()pt Si.mpleMajöriQ' Vote Yes.Qu3

GROUNDS "'OJJEXCI..tJSlON

i. Rule 14a~8(ì)(9).- çnnmÇls.~~t!b..compaIl""s Pmposal

Vnoor Rule l 4ì.~8(i)(~), a sb~trehôld~r propo5al may be omitted fhim .a I.ompamy' s proxy

stntemenì ¡ (tbe pn1posal "coof1cís 'jviti one of the c:ompfy' ß 0\\'1 proposab to be submitted u,

sharcho!dc:s at the same meeHng.-'

The Proposal seeks to change toa simple majority 'V'otiiig sm1dard aU sharch(ilder voting requiremeoill hi the C(1tllpálÌY~S ccrt.ìficate ofincorporntioiî ~IÍd nylaw~ tMt mIl for a greater thatt

simple majority vote, The l)ropøsaf implicates t\:vo reguiremel)tsofthe y's ReS1.ated CeJ'tincatkm nfIm;()IpraÜOll (the "CertiJícate') and the Amendi;..d and Restat Byla\vs (the

'~B)'law~t') i

The first is containedinAJ1ic,(e-s VU andVmoftbe Certificate relating to b:U;:itiê~ 1.L)inbiJj~Ün!1s (à merg.er~. sale aiaH or substatially altof the Company' 8 a.s~ts,or purchase of an orsiibstantially ufdieassets çfffJJìtìthi: entity) wiûipers-tms . ("lntcresred pt;r.S\)~s'"l\.\'lmhrJild !íJt(,re than 5% of the outstanding .shai-es üfthe C()f)'rl'l!Dyi)i~llCiîirié of the trammçtioTI; i\rtide

\/11 requii'.es a vote Qffhur..fHìbsMthe Gutstandhig shares tüa'ppr(i¡\¡~âu!f business combimdioii \\'llh an Ituere$t(:d Person imlessti)fhett~stùÜotl išø:i)pròvedlJytheC~inpanY':s. BOíìl'\lbf Dittctorsatid(ii)a niajority ofH:icmCtlibernofthe BoMc '~,'etetiieiiibers(U~the Boordb~lnretlic..

¡ Tn addition, ~f¡c C~rt¡ficatè l'tUiros the affittnfithlè yote ùf the. holders of R- imljorliy or d:ie~'oting pO'wtr

(If tliç stock ofthe Company emíted I() .vble Uéncrai!y in the el~ün of directo.rS in order to inCre.áè or decrease tblZ number:of allltíútazLo( sh.ut,'1, a.i¡ rcq¡u in.-d by S~4;tkm 242 .of tlie Del2f\v.re General

Cmpol'Jltinn Law. Sitièe.i di.mge in ~b¡s provi;¡ion ,,\'ol11d not beÎI1 compllôllí::e withatJplìtaNe l¡,¡w.s.\Ic

do Mt ¡tlttrpte~ !he Prpt:t.i¡l' a5 implicating this prQvlsion. The Certitkawaloo c(¡lm1Íns vatiÙU$

ltm'js¡iJ:i~ relating to "tit~$ of :sçparntç classcs of sWell and these PfOVtSjoos rtt¡tUire á "'ote of at rmijodt)' ()f j,h~'lrc iyf tbe t-eIç"J\n t r:h:is.'S outsanding, Theoo provis.ions. t1t ~í() ttMí;get ()lJorJtHv'C, bÜWt:'lCf, bc,am¡c

the $cpimttc CiaS5CSOJ" s;~k termed to in the-sc p1'ovis.ioins: tir liO limger Olií$ìal1dìn~,

U.S. ..Sccuritie.s and.Exdiaïigc. øi:nrmijssì(tn October 23. 20()9 Page 4

hltere:)tedl~rsmt ~C(llJÌrtIl101'tthaL1 5~'ò(,ftbeC()ntpatl~/"s shares, ..\rtiele VIUreguh'e$a ''iiØ(~

of fO~JT~nfthsofoiili:taooing theshari:foaniend. Article 'VLL.

Tlicsc('u:md sUi)erniljorii)rrequiremcnt implicated ibyÛieli1I'pnirJ is tiie réuíremC'fin J~¡cle :Xøf.il Certîjj~atc and ArlìdelXofthel3ylawBrelathig tOMløllùmelltQfih(fiiyl~ws. llwscprovisionsNguire a vow "ftwo",thirds ofthc ontstæding shares to~ttu:;nd. thcCompiUl)"S

Bylaws unless diC -am(;~TKimtmt¡s appt'üvødb'ydJ~B(iärd!jfDiredors(in ..\lh¡.drça$~, no

sharholder vote is r~ll.!irL'd).

The Boa or ()ÎreiOfS oHhe Company has expressed its i,ntetU. to present toshapcholders ~t tbe 2010 Ammal Meeting prtl)()sats to amend etn;h ofthe prmdsioiis of the CeriiriC$tc

implìcated by the P'r'OPQsal. SpecifIcally, the Board ìntends to pttlpÓSè amèndmerits toAriides

VII iid vm to reduce the rier~~ita&e of Ol!tsimiding shars requÌl'ed ro approve traÚSÛ;l;tklIs \'lith..........-.-''_.''..' _', _ .--..-.,'__ . ',",.".',,---_-," _..._--.d ....'.'::-,-:-:...,--.).-::'-,'.-:-:---':\-:-:-:.,:.:-_'-..'._.',,'._,'.'.::_",,",_,--".: .u:.__'::-:_-_-;::--:-..-:.:-:_:--__".,,' '._ _ _ ',.

Interesioo Persons (and to ;fm('Ùd ifis provision of the Certiflitat.e) from f'our.Jifllis to iw()~lliirds. Thi:s is the shareholder ,,''cte that isreauil.ed tbr npproval of cCl1;¡jn ttauct.iOllS with "Îriterested sUld:.hüldel'..t under SeeÜon 203 of the Delm\!'ar Geneml Cütpor4tìon hiW, g,ectÌün 203, l,\'hH~

it diners in some respects fr.,,m r. p.rovisions: uffue CQmpanyfg CertH1cate, î,JJ .¡m~ll)gous, to,:.:_:-.:_,:: ", ".: ','.',.., - _ _ _,', _ ',. '__ _,' '," " _ " ,. _, d,.-'. _.: _ _ _.: _ _ _ ___. _:::- ___.. _ " ',_ .,_- _ " _ ',. _ _ _ _ _ _'_ '._ _ __ ',", _ _ _

these tivisJom! Rod the BC4"ld has detemiined that Îl would be appropriate to adopt the VOth1g.......- ...._--..- --.......... ," ,- '. ... ... - . . .

standar set for in SOCl:(tfl 203.

8ecol1d"fhø.Bö~~dblt~l1dst('ptQPose.a:i.amendment to Artkle;X.¡)ftheCcrtifit=~tc(and" if di¡it ~nien(lirclatisapprôi.edby sbiireb0IderS). to mnend . Article . ix QfilcBylaws)tore4uq~ ~he vole Jcgl1írooJhr $hm,h~)lder ûmendUK'1itnf Byla\vs fi\(miwo",tlii~s i,)f9U1SrãlJcling sJuares toi~

majt)rity t)fnuIstltooing slmres. Tbe.BOMd ha$de~miiiicdtbJl~ thisJeycl.ofapprovai..is àpproprìatetopH.ltect rrdtlorttj' rights. undtf thcnylaws.

lfiiiêlucled Ìtl.the Compaity's ptiny síatern(mt, thcIlroposalwotddcúnnkt directlY'i.iiii, the Cotnjfao):'propostdstk'Sciihed al.Q\'t. TheCollpanyd~pn?rx)sals sèëk .~~h¡mge Jucxactl)' d~ provisionsil1"tplicatedhythe . lrop(~sal,. but lrnpti~cadíff1$rcnt approach. .lfihei)r9P().$~ . W'eft

¡#)~cludied ittll'æptQ;iystatì$ tdtsnfthevotes on the Pr()p()S(,1 and tncCompany's proposals c(ll.dd:y'¡~ldîllc(m$istetlt, Æimbi~uolts or inoonclusìveresi:dts.. ..Polt;xarnple. iethe PrtlpósaJandcachriftheGonipai1fspfi)pOsnls received' fl maiønty üf"'ott'scast~ but none recehredìhe 11Utlibei:(jf V(lt~liet.'tsâ¡ry .toainieudtoo.. Certifica,te, .it.\v(,ndd .l'(~tbe elea'L\'betlier

fa) fuê .Com~n)' Slltiiild.takestepstnbllpleinønl..the .$bmh(..lderts..PrQlJó$al..~:Fsulml¡ttl1g

ameiidmentsconføriiiing..tÚ.tli¡;.PrÙp(lsÖlåt.. the .ooxt..sh.liolders ineetingor (b). ~(tln8ein~

C(irn~lrty;s.prol)osals díd.llut.~~stt1ie.Cünipåny...sb()ufde()n~híde~t .lhere,isiusuffcicnt support..fof. re~uci~g.the...$~rJl)ajtYrty..~qMlremenis 5o..that s.tI~lii5tìn.gamel1dm.ent~cmíf/)miiI1g

t().tbelrt)PQi~rdtou sbnreboldervotc.would be futile.

U ÆL SeciiitJes m:tcl ExçMngî1COrilOJisskiIl Octooor 23, 2009 Page .5

Ai~\.~1'ltltiveJy,¡f tbe sh~reboldct Pra¡pl J:eceive-l arMjorit)' ofvotesca.,ì~md . (.ll1e or

inorei)ftlle OømpalnY~$proposalsreceivedsumê¡ent votes. to be adopted, if would not be cleat

'Wheïhllthere.woiiM he sidì1dent suppCirtf01' further reducing the super~rmiJ(írity tCt(uirerncnts?

The staff has cortsjstendygnintedno~actitinreUefjnJciianu~011llnd(tt )tule 1 %d~(i)(9) and ii~ predccesSór, Rule ~ 4a8(c)(9),wilh r~spectto pr0lls.aJ.sbiJwl1ichtm. affiril1ativevote (tfl

both the shai'elioiderpm~)sal and the compan)' , sprO¡Xls-I \"l:mldl£adtoan. incon&tsÊcnt, ,:unbil:UOltS f)r inooncl!lLs:ive result. $tlli, (f,g., Beslßt(y ('fì".lm:.(Âprit17,2()09)("l1,¡sr.JJu.v"); AOLTime jf'lIl'ì:t!l'. hu:, (Man::h 3, 200i)~.F'Jrs!jViClgar(j.F¡rtandiClt(¡tt)lfP, lnt~, (Mardi7,2t)02); a,'fê'Oledi, Inc,. (Aprn.24, lOG()), OabelliEquif)' 1'J'llst(Mat~hJ',1993);Fiicl1btlfgG(LS antI

EJectricCo.. .(Jiily3P,1991,kß,stBu)"1nvolvoo s4Jlbs:lantlvefythe silm(;ptòlJ.slas that p~~ta~d here.. ..ASlife,8¡f$tBÚyput fOrlbproposal;í. to çlm~nd.c'ch offu:eptc;v¡si(~rt5 ofits çliarteraiidbYltl~~\¡'8¡mpnø."ltlZdb~f ibesha~eJi1ider'$ propòl. Thest~frconcurre that thefe Wi):;

ahasis l(rexch.idc. the j~l'npO$~dunderRtde.I 4a~:8(i)(9).

For tlJC fbregoin:g fea~ø;tìs,. dic eómpmi~' ñeHeveitrnåyproperlYß;xdudØ: tb~Pn)pi)s~l fiti'm t1ie201() Proxy MlÛerial5UliderIt'Ule14~-8(ì)(9),

Rtïl~i.iil~S(i)(3') - Violattofi (ill¡it-i.xy.Rltles,~I~rohibi~edHk"ÇIl)Utl Tying

Arranï!t:meiit

The Proposal is iricon;sìstení wiih i!e "unl:mndlhig" ptÜVIS1QI)S of Rule 14.a-4(ii)(:1)"

Und~r Rule 14a-8(l)(3), à shaehoaooT proposalm.ay be omitted from a t(lml~í:Y's proxy sta£emenHftbc proposa is COtUf,j' ((1 any ufthe ConmiissJ()JÙl proxy niJes. Rule 14¡:-4(~)(3 ~

r;;ruires the form ofpJ'oxy t(. "idcntíf)' dead)' llöd imparlíaUy each $e:pa:~te máHcr intened: 10 be acted ttpon. whether or not related to or èonditioned on the ~Lpprov~il of other imlttttS, ~'nd

whether propüsed by ¡he registrant or by :se¡;,i'u:ity holders/' As tIie Comndss;\on .cxplahæd with

respeeí to Rule 14a~4(a) in Exebangc Ácl Release No. :; 1326 (Oct 16.19:92), the rule "pmhibîfs . eieetoral tyiög .amímgcment:s tht restrict sharholdcrvotii:icho1ces Qomaìters put before

:slmreholders for apPl(val. It

TIle Proposal ask~ shateb()Iders to yot£ on \\'bedier' to a,~k ~be Büard to take steps to

cliang:e "each sbtireholder votìng requirelMil hi mlr ch~t1~r aJld bylaw$ that calls tì;Yr u grcidcr

U;ifi~ simpl.i majority v'Qte.'" 'J1ie Pn:rös~d dtlCS not ideiitifY the priw.skms ar1eçïcd by this

request, Imt Kl:; desri boo ~boYe, tiie P'oollsali.plleates two distinct sets üf pmvisioilS in ¡he

2 The $rWatkmìs further (;omp(¡c~k'i by the fiiet that tiie sluirchöldef sPlio541 -encompasses more tbatt

one çhaiigc l'O the Cert¡jkaac, wliíle the ClJmpi.my's prOIKl&'llsc wm address each r;n.ange separmely, s() lruil

h \Vûukl not he deni' Whietbt:r .¡ VQtc for the sharehoJder'.s Prüpi;¡,sid expr~ses: sup;olt tor boih it,liang~s Or

jltSl oneeifthe dia¡nges. We address ttiìs as asepite !!J'mlJQ fíjf excJudîng the Pro¡xal bd()w.

U.S. Stç")t¡~ii; ànd Exclwige Ci;);rnmissi(m O~t()oor 23, 200fJ Page 6

Company's CerfÌJliCat~ rmdB)'lin,vs:onedeaUngwÎlh husi:iss combinatiQn trnnsactions \'tlth i~)t~restedpèr5(mS; the other dealing \vith ænendment of the Compâny.'s Bjd:a"ivs. "lhe PropOsal docs notgive shiireholdersthcllipJIrtimlt)' to distinguish betw¥1cn thc$etw()£Çtsofprovìsìûns. Thdr CJiOi00"5 are ilerefo.rerestrlcted to voting .mr bodr ebanleSòri'~insr botbchange$., Howev~r,thefS twü šèts ofprQvisioll mayiiothe\!icwedcquall)' hy slmreholders, A

shareholder may veryt\'enappro'i':; red1.lctkm £0 tilesu~rinaJodly.pil)vi;$iön 1'01' shard'ioider approvalof bylaw~mendments but disapp~)VeQrarediictiOJlJQ.tlieRupemiaJorily provision ftyr

shtircholderapprovalofbusiness combinlitìontmsacdoll~urvIcè vcr5~L . TIiePi'üpüs~ldt)es nt"! give sna:'eholQe:rsth.cnppoI11mìty to Vt)~ ror ó.rlèchlm~e andagaàiist tbCiØlbëdl

In .shnH$lr sitl."1tions;lriwhkhtheprop(lI1ent has not s.rntedtbeprnpôsi:din. 41.\VßY to

sntnsfytbe.."sÍ1igle .Pt(,p(tsaJ~rcquircmeilt.in RUle.14w$(il(3). the .Cummi~~¡lm.ha£~grecd. to. the e.xclusio:tJJtproposals that cæçiJtv.iith.~ sñ:igle ~.enel'ål$l.b;ieet m~tte:rbet()use. th~rpreseiii; ivw) scpnratcpl'opooab;, See HCii1lh&uih Cm:pOl'ätll1,i(AprlIJi. 2(06) (exclusion ofapropusjpresenÜ~gtW.oáitier:diiicOIsto .~\\"O separ4(eanddistmctpro\la~ioü:,')i;ftbel;L)mpaJly'sb)flaw$

ev~m .tlimJgh~itbTlmemltmmts mEatoow. thc.size~inde()mpositiQlltJftliebQard ()fd¡rt~tors); (:ØlîlN¥ So.liwal'e(Marcl:Jh 20Q31(exclusÌQr: ora p1'pCts~.dthatç(msi5ted ÓfH.VO COlllpttleJiiS

relate . nee); F'otoMlr, Jttl.',(Ma~¡?fl997)~(tt;idusi1)n of n$hâte~lßiM~f

~l)'Qt)QsaLr~()IDmçiidil1gamtmdineJlt ()rtbet(Ymp.ny~s.. . .. ...... f¡çatepfloeotpt)t~tionfByiaws 01'

governance pQHdes. ti) impösevariousJ\:quil'cmuru$ rehntngJôdiructm~nipen~mtît)tIand s~~ck ownersbip), .Hcn~, the..Praponent¡s~ttettipting.íosatisfythe "s¡n~J~. proposal"reqiiircmentuf Rililgi%~~(ç) hy.artPûi \\iQrding, bUitiJidoìng 539 ,he ftstriêls sharcholdercnùkes in èÜnh'4ni~.rtitln

(d'RM~e 14a-4(a)(3).

For this reasön,the. CQm~iJY bctJ.çyCS it D13;l' pmperlyexctude l.beProposal fronT the

2010 Proxy Materials.undcrRule 14.a~8(¡)(3)_

), ~..§(i)(Jl~Vìolat¡on ofPWXì' .ß~,,~~y.~1aí.criaHvFaIseat1dMi~

Starelnents

As t!i~ ~Uaff explained in Stä.ll'.e:glil Bulletin "No. 14B (Sept, t 5,2004), Rule 14a8(f)(3) permits the c.xdusiori of aU ()f' ;¡of a shareholder pruposa) or !te supporting st.tcment ìt: ami:mg other tlihig£ thecumpany dc:iim:istrtes .objectively that a làch.i..d starement is m;¡WriaHy f¡:dsè -or mislcooin,g.

J Of CÚI.'. if tbe Prpl)5a.1 \;,'crc bifuJeatoo to addrs~ die l'ytÙ qm:sÜons si;piJrn~~i% one of the ptOPOs.Llii

\\'öuld violate Riil.c 14m~8(c), WJiie11 Unlits pmpom:nls to one propoSflinr a partieii(ar Slìì!èn.(¡.ldcr

meebng.

U,S. Sccuritie~ .imd Exchange COnîmissií.)I October 23, 20oi) Page 7

In thisregarct'wel'equesttha.t,Jtthe Staffdoes notC(U1CYf in. tbeexclusionoftlre

proposatín Itseinirety íÔtlbeooaSOlis~tfortbabove. the StaffcooCUT\vìdi exchisiofl of the foUowang. Silìt~nceoftbe siip~ortillgs~teoi:entbcrJ3use of themuiietQusinHc~llladesit..ooniabiit=i"Aylwin Uwìst whoconsdtLtted25%üf(~ur~;rcutiveP4lY aind NOil.Îlialipii Cmllmitt~$.WttS

desigiuiteda ":faggêdlprobleml dh'ector" his involvement wTthihebÖa:t'd of hbilliburtoit \vhich llldunits thai fHed for Chapter 1.IBarimptcy.~' Tliefa~S'eand mislcadingelements ()fthis stJitementìnchide the full,owing;

due to

,. lvtr. Lewis.is oilcoffive(riotfouf)membcrs ófeacn.ofil ConipensatlOJ1

Committ~ and. theChrvernänce and NOluinating C(Jmriî.tëe~",tiich are misn~mcdby theP.roponeiit the ""EXcëutivc Pay" and "NotninnHöij" eoinmItiiees).

· ThcCorprate Líb~'.(to whl)ni.weassunie.lhePropoi\~t¡st$l~rr¡ngf. tbOltgb. ttd$ iš lIi,splidl1oo1~Çi\yh.ereoo:Yt¡bes a. "flagg~dd'direct(Jr .~'t. $)

"pmblem~'.directçtl'.

,. The statementí~ilst~I1otethatthe"GankTLlPWY" tefcrrcd'.to ItS a ba'Hsr(1rMt.

Lel¡v1$ be¡ngafla~~t:~(iirec:()r1¡\1ls:aL004 prepac!kageaQh~ptL1'i.1

plOooditl£.$eimJ1gåUnpcnailÔfuture~~b~t~s-.~nd smca-rclate\lc~äbn~ klg~illst çcr8iu rla,nUh1.Qfr~ulJ~¡dirnc.~.$.~ 13i; oll1irtiiigthe'$e det.ails and stating ilmt¡t. is. ib.ebm¡;is l(itconsidenngMr. Lewis~. "problënf'director 7 the

si~1li;m(.nt faIsely implies that the pro¡zee:ding evidenced snme'lliilure- of

buidnessjudgm~J'àl l.!pònthe panfHaHiburton;si:tÎrcctmswben, in fäct, the procecdingcomi:titutedJiOdiir.;g ttlJreíban a mechanism for.theéf1itierM.and effective. resoloti(ln6fa5bC;tos~allÔsì lka-l'eI ated cJ;¡ims. The statement also

impn~s tbatÄ.'lr.. Lewis tS øUlté:ftly .a. member of dicllóa.rd ~)fH~mhllri(m~ thoughli~båsnotservedonthe Boa.rdof H~iUibtltori since 2005 .

4 See Note ~O to ¡hoe lÏnltl1ctai sÍltementH':itaiiioo in HaUibuñOl1':¡ Annual R~rt on Form 10.1( ftlthe

j'cnr t,"nded: rkGeml~r 3 1. 2008.

u. S .Secudtie~al1dExr.Üm.ngc Cominis.iönOçti;)I:x;r 21. 2009Page 8

For this reasotl~ thc Cumpany oolieve Hm~ypropcr1~'(Zxcludetbel;etereflcoo.si;ntc:icc ofthe $UIP:pot'tirig slitemein for thePn.'posal Jromthe: 20J (JPl:O~Y Mäteri.álsiiiderRüleR 4a:--8(i(3).,

CONCI.V8.10N

ila'5L.tliapon ûie fort:g()ifl~.axifliyS¡S. the Company hereby rt'St"èlfIJU;t'icQ1lllstsûianbeSî~.tT eonfimit!iiit ¡~\\'in not tcmnmcnde:nm:remeriI ncliuo if the f)rùposallsexchidcdfrot11 the

C(lmpmay's 201 0 Ptoxyrviatel'¡~d$~)r,~It!Cnutíveh'tifthere:fèreli(;ed.scntcrice .of tlieSi;pportiôgstatement OrtltlPrOp(lS~ii¡;scxci'Uded, l)lt:~ie do no( hesitate tòcaU me fit (S18) 56Q.6126.orby

return e-mJJjI. ìfXoureuire: ~tditl~)náiiilfonnatiø!iQl'wishto dìš,mss thissubmiZlsîuri further,Flease. ackn(~wledge receiptor thisleiter91'reUJmc--t1iL

We.l'tquestt1iat you. tr.awnit .)'t)u:r tespousihy e-maHto theutl(lersignç,~d ~t

Rogtr.PattelS01~!.J)isney\c'(lmand itnderstand that )'üu (;~ll trausrniîxoiir resp()tt~e to ibeI~rollmient~lH'nug.h.Mr....CMvedden ..~~

rIumk vüu. !br. vuurattenIÌoll1o this matter.,.. .,:, ,": ,'. '.' "- -," .... .~.' :.... ...._, ',,', -:...:' :'-','-_., --.,--, -' " .'- . . ....., ,"..:' .,.... ,"" ..".'" , ,. .

S\ìícetely,

lv,igef J, P~tti"Toon

ee: Jühl1 Chevcddcl1

\VHIia:m SteinC'r

Attad:miet)t~ f£xhibif A - P:roposal.and ~!)fte~po:tN;k'ncc


Mr. John R PepperChairmii m the BoThe. \Valt Disy Compay500 S Buen Vist St

Burbi CA 91521PH; 8 (,8 56U-JOOOFX: 818-S60~1930

RUle' 14a-S Propo~

Dear Mr. Pepper.

ls~bmit m)', artlæRue~4a'li#oEí()i;iIin siipt()hbe19nJ¡.,i~ .pef~.Qcf,(,í.-üomjXJ..My.proposalísførilel1emtli'Hua~haredderm:~mg. lio,~ndiQ..rneet Jtule.14a-8rcqwremimtsinelooin,g loocootinuau;s;()v;ner$bil)Qf~reaiJtre$tock valuc'Uwidla.ftth date

of tlrre~ve. shholder m~lng. ~fy gubmitoo.fùrat,wÍtb~sharhoidei'",supplied

c~~sjij.isfuRJedtctbe. ucfotde1nitivep\lÕliçaii:on, . ThIs is mYlIOI\'Y forJo1m

Cheveâdenmidlör.ms deignee ro fom'Mdtls. . 14a-8 prO'òsal t:othcowpaymidtoaetl1lu

my bebalf~~fhs Ril14a,"gprpos.I~.mG,lörmoditl~tîônof1t,. for the fòrtIiømin8hareholdemot~ befòre"dur andnfìer the lbrntin,g Sba.rchol4ermeetrt" P~ea1edlrectaU fu~CtJJlrn~îcatiQIÌ$ .regaringmyruie14a.~.prQPn.qa1 tqJo,1~l'lChe'veade~

i e~ctLls¡vely,

Your t~TI$Í4erfltLøîl~ld the tiUlisideratÌonQfúi 8(t~aid of Dîro,iorn.ts .appteciatoo inzmppórt ofthct long-ter perforrmmceof ()ureompay. PleasadmQwlooge receipt ()t mj' proposalproltlptly. bYeimL

Sifi~tilY:t AA~'WUHamSteioor

WDate

ns/ó r

L'Ci

Ci~ Alan Bravcrm,¡AtßJlJlrnvtm~n~DjSf"cofJCorpate Secreta



ri)IS;Rule14a4tP1'opnsal, S~ptenibe.rI4, 2009) 3- Adopt Simple Majarity Vo-te

RESOLVED; SlJareloMtlf$requèst. .tk~ .oUt board Sie~s.nRcesârY. so.llat.each

sharehDldervp~¡tig n;quÌlcmct in our cliaer ~lld . . .. that c¡Tlhrf(lagte~T ib.oo$im;ple

inajoot)r vote, be changed 10 amAörityoftlr vote~sttbr~ldag~msirebited~ropol$1ti .wniplianVl'Îtb applictible ~'S, Thi mctudeseaeJi 80%sbaielolderJ'Qt._nspiroyi.iiQu in our

cl~a.er aoolurbyla\vs_

Curently ...u.... iWn~nûnori£r can.~at~.. the .wm of our..'79o/tIsharel1olde. nUtjor.ty.()ur supemajol'Hy",otereu1relèItsCa¡ .ti...... almost irnposiblett)l)b~nw1ieno!1coonside$ abstentions and ..bmke .nt)t'HófØle5, Forexamplcza Goodyear. (Gl)~emçnìpr"~).~ for awmal electron ofeachdîreçtQr. failedm ...~..'eveo though 90% of votes cast were. ye.'?votC$, SUl'erajority1'auiltmentsareW'guhlytnøstl)ftefi us ti:) h.look in:itimivessupponecl by IDQSÎ

sharu\Jfol'sbut opp(1sed bym~gement.

'llr(.;mindlof Inslituth-;n.al ltwèSr)rs.'~)~.cll.org recommendsOO.Qiiti.(to.Qfsìmple'rn~orlty vodn~. This ptópô~topÈc won up tQ$8%.~rtat tbc:foIlowins,5t)n:ipawsm20():

Goldm8l) S~hs (OS) 15% McRitebie(Spcì:t)W t(\V) 80% .FílSt.. . ~m%iRR~rT.Ubevedien Macy;,s(M) 88% \V1HiOl Ste1f

Tbemerits~fthìsS¡mpieMajorIty.'UltêprO¡)osishou1d msooo OOD$idtftd.inlM oonwxt()ftbc iieedtQiniti..are irnpn:tve .Oï.C(~r:~y1S(:Orpomt goW-mMcC:Vo.f Îrtsuuice ll120Q9'the f(iIl()t\1Ilggovermmoo:ì.. . 'k'eeiden:û6ed;

..'rbCQrpo.r1t'Líbrarl1tt:II\V'iv.r~tJ.~mur41wJibrar.oom.lIiOepe~~lt l~l'~Stmr;tresech finn. ,m.ed. ÓllTCOmpany

""D" OveraL. O;HighGovenianee. Risk.As8eSSn1lint.

"V~r'IJli~ConcelI~~iti~~eçud:~ paX- S:mmiHìon.fnr Robert 18er.

· Aylwbi I,ewbi~ whocciimned2.s%ôf t1urExectìve Pay and N omj:rt;Ql\ Cocrmnitte.es,

\"'~~øsàgnatedtintl~lg~edLprobleiiildi~k)f" ducio blsinvolvement with fheboar of HallòUlpE"'lVnlchhadunitsllatfiledfprCMPter 1 i Bai'tc.

.Wc l:~id J'lO shbolder ri,ghtk~~ l)CaH .as:ecfa¡1 IIl~tiri,g.21Asimll1c nialadtYVCit~~nær. .l)Cumultive voting

.mghf QfJ(urditors also. served tm bo~ rate ÓI.D"Qr~'F"by'ICnrpte Lìlmi.r:JQhnBryson. B()eing. (IlA)Jo1m Pepper Hoso!) Sci~litl~(BSX)101m C'hn WeUs.Far.8() (WFê) . Judith Estri tl~dE;(.(f1X) MonicriLozmi Baiik ofArca (HAC) O;rnSluifl ..... ... . ....... ..NIKR(NE) I:,"r~ted Roliet.Ma1~çhuJJflt Visa . Susan Amold .... .MeD... (M.CP)

The. alit)'~ecopr.emssb1Jwstliel'ei;s Dee tQiimpi:o~'cicnt. Pleaeooco11agc our bøimtores"ei;dfJosttbl~yi()tbis.proposal: Ad.optShnple ~l-ajmityVGte

.Y~oii3

NÓfei:W'IUlani Sreinet $jJtl1'sQrc\i this p:mpoša.t

The ál.refma.t¡sl'~u~tt\fof pûblicatQIlWiiÌQiire~.eqi~. J(?fiJrmardngoreIHl1'inati6ì(lf

ie.x~ includinbeg~aildcontludigtext,unlessprim:agr~~ment h~ reabed. It .isre$peçtûUyr~Û'sr tlitllispro.pø~beiw()0fidbéfôrè ítíspublìshedirrlle def~ve .

îí)etl,Siute thflithJntegríf)r.'Qfthe~bmittdfor.atis.relicm intlicproxy mmerIals.lease advise inhere is ~lYpngarJiícåqi:estion.

PleascTIQIe tbthetttle oltIproposaiSPariifthearumCtitiñf.ttVoroltbeprpösa, In the

ìntestiif clfity androavoid cônfuslônthe tíïle of thi$ andeonotn ba.UotiteooÎs rei.red tobe cQJislsrentlhol1ghmit aU th~proxtt'matma1s.

lhe~~n~' is:reqootî. ~signapÏøposal nlI~ by"3"'~ibmreJb.$e4()n theeltfOnê)logí91t0nfrb:iV;bil#pt(posam:e silbmitted. ..... . .. . l'ne~ dC5igiaii6n'()f"31~()rhight;rnumberåU4JWS.fcir.rati.fIcalQTI .o:aootrt'sto .beita: i.

Trus prop0:5a1.ìsbe.lievl..~ditor~nfol1nwillfStaJ..egfJiuiiètinNoi 14B(oi;').St:plniber.li,

2004 h~lLldjIl (emphaîsad¥):Accordingly. .g.oîngfotwatdfwß'beJ¡evethatìtwøuldnotbe.~pptoprìatefOfcQmpaniæto'eXdUde$UPpor~st1lt~mentlsnguaéaoø'óràn..sniire iproposal.inreliaooeon rute.14a-8(íJ(31jntl~foIIPwirielrêumst~o .. .

¡, theoon"panyobjècttOf~~Ia$$êrtbnsbÐøa .... . ... ......yarsl'otstJPportooi· the.oopanY9bjE~t()f~ala$$ertioæthatt.whUenotmateriallyJarse. ørm~l~ding.tnaybe.disptJtêdorõOtllered;.tn~cQrnpanYt)bj~ to fadual a$$ei1ìQnsbe.t:use. thæe ClssertiÖnamaybeintefPretet by. shareholders in a marlOe'tthatis .unftvorabh:! to theco~ny, ìt~diæctofs,.Ol ils.Qffce; :and/or

. thê .. Y obj~tos~~nt~becausetheyrepre~ttl'opìnJonoftheshare .proponemor arefere~d .soræi.buttMsta~ntsale notfdentrfispeclrcally as such.

Wøc beliéve that it is Bppl'opnafeunder rule 14.'fQrcOmp::nies to addresstheseôbJéttions in theIr stát~l1ønts.of opposition.

SeemSll: Sun Mi.:rosystems, 100, (July 21, 2005).Stock \,~U be held m:til after th mnual meeti~ and the prosa wm be tirèßXtëd at IDè anualffl.:!Crln,g. Pleae aeknówlèdge tWsproposal prompty by r:m

........ -, ," '.'-' ,',:':-,' _'c'_"_ ..-.....:.:'.....,. ,', ,', . ',.: -,'. ....- -...................._ _'_ ....... *** FISMA & OMB Memorandum M-07-16 ***

Sèptèmbi:r i 1, 2009

VIA OVE.RNIGUdJ~ CõÜRlgR

Dea Mr. Stein(:r;

This letH:~r wil ilc.kiöwledgc: tbm we æ.¡ive.d o.n SepEem~T 14; 2000. your letter daèdSeptemoor 14. 2009 subìning.n p.ropol tòr cOMtderti~)n at the Compay'.$ 20 i Oännrl,:i;1meeting of stockholders tegMdí:g simple majorit)i vbie.

W~.have .WlitlnnedEb~t 'yoiimesttooelitihintyreuirei1~ntsforsubmittirig apropo$8l. set tbrh

In Rule 14a~g(a)to (t),txoopttlt wehavedclçtJ¡~~it~tYOUMe not aregšteæhoidert)rshams andYn~~'lrIH)t~llpib.,? wîth tbertuirmr.'nlnfR.ul~14a~(b)(2,(i:)UJat )'ouprovide llwriltenSttfemnt frmn.the. re£(îtdhoMer Qfsha~yøu..DcnendaUYg\lm verifying thai)'cond.nutiuslyheldsecii'iiics of The Wilt DiimCom~'tQrltt j~stóne year, As requiredhyRule 14á~8(f)(1:~;~u $f~t)wd.provi& us wÎtli Uiiss!:it~nt witmn .14 da)i:olyour reççtptof this

ltltte.r,

JóJm Chevedden


friay, Octdb~r oi, 2009 7~61 AMf'atte.of1¡ RogerAtan Bra~'êtm.;rif4le 143.8 Brck-e Le~êr-(OIS)

CCEOOOO. p.f

Mr, Pattêl'SOft.Pleasesee.the.at1açhed hroker letter. Please advise whetherth.ereare nów ariyrule 14a,,8openitems.S inoorely..

J()hn Cheveddetl

cç~ '''imam S(eincr


DISCOUNT BROKERS

Da: ;i oa;?tJOC¡

Towbom it nm'~m:

.~

.wmliCi1d m le f~'O I.d dtTl1a WQ of threa pr tò thßc æle th~. wæ suilneå to'tbe co.

S.inerely~

L1ì1~1(. ifdi~.L/o

.Mi Fil~~PJideniD.m:Oisnt.~

J981 MJireu$ Ai,C'I\IJ~ " Suite elM.. t;r¡¡ Siuces. NY n041

:îiiLl,UI-1600 .800.69S.&\Y wWlv,dffd6"ronl F:t SI~'JZS-i3n



Pattersònt Roger

Fro:Sènt;To:Subject~

Pautt¡fson, Rògè:tMiday, Oc~obe¡05, 200~ 11~u; AM

RE~ RU'le 14a-J, ar~t! t.~r-(t)IS)

Th~tt' are¡'p ~dd¡diniäiprovedur;i items under.14a~8;que:n¡()t4'l1 thrfJugni5.

Fl'()m;,t¡m$t:d..rmâ!lt Sent: FridaYJ Oetber04l.i009 7~SS At1TO:P'ttrSó!' Rògër

subjec itlU~ ìAa,.ßraker le'ttéw-(DIS)

Mr.. P.atter50n,Please sootheaít1cbetbroker letter. Please.advise \lr'licther there .arenQwany rule) 4a-8 open¡terns.

. Sini;erelYtJdlinChe'i/eddert

cê: \Villiam Steiner

!



the walt disney compay; rule 14a-8 no-action letter..."disney" or the...

Documents